XPost: alt.politics, talk.politics.misc
From: cryharder@pussies.net
On 2/12/26 8:10 PM, pothead wrote:
> On 2026-02-12, Meme them till they cry wrote:
>> On 2/12/26 1:19 PM, Alan wrote:
>>> On 2026-02-12 09:47, Meme them till they cry wrote:
>>>> On 2/12/26 12:16 PM, Alan wrote:
>>>>> On 2026-02-12 08:56, Meme them till they cry wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/12/26 11:43 AM, Lee wrote:
>>>>>>> Socialism is for losers wrote in
>>>>>>> news:01fpokhj028c4m7m7at2sdob5dfb431p97@4ax.com:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 11 Feb 2026 16:07:42 +0000, Lee wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Socialism is for losers wrote in
>>>>>>>>> news:lvqmokli1khclbi61c4d9t0ts4r9eq51ir@4ax.com:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 10 Feb 2026 17:02:17 +0000, Lee wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> bks@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>> news:10mffk4$lo$5@reader2.panix.com:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> | Do you think that Donald Trump was involved in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> crimes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> | allegedly committed by Jeffrey Epstein?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> | Yes.....: 46%
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> | No......: 30%
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> | Not sure: 24%
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>>>>>>> | President Donald Trump has repeatedly maintained that he
>>>>>>>>>>>> | had no knowledge of Jeffrey Epstein's sex crimes.
>>>>>>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>>>>>>> | But in July 2006, just as Jeffrey Epstein's criminal sex
>>>>>>>>>>>> | charge became public, Trump called then-Palm Beach police
>>>>>>>>>>>> | chief Michael Reiter to tell him that Epstein's activities
>>>>>>>>>>>> | with teenaged girls were well known in both New York and
>>>>>>>>>>>> | Palm Beach.
>>>>>>>>>>>> |
>>>>>>>>>>>> | "Thank goodness you're stopping him, everyone has known
>>>>>>>>>>>> | he's been doing this," Trump told Reiter, according to a
>>>>>>>>>>>> | 2019 FBI interview with Reiter contained in the Justice
>>>>>>>>>>>> | Department's Epstein case files.
>>>>>>>>>>>> | ...
>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> government/article314631578.
>>>>>>>>>>>> html>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> --bks
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The same Trump who paid Stormy Daniels
>>>>>>>>>>> #130,000 to deny the sex he never had with
>>>>>>>>>>> her.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Stormy Daniels was an adult.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And Trump lied about screwing
>>>>>>>>> her and bribing her.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can't condemn him for that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can't condemn Trump for anything.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Who wouldn't have lied about screwing her?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So you admit Trump lied.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not that you care about that....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just your daily reminder that Trump released 3.5 million more
>>>>>> documents from the Epstein files than Biden.
>>>>>
>>>>> Because Congress passed a law requiring it...
>>>>>
>>>>> ...and he's actually in violation OF that law.
>>>>
>>>> Now explain Biden's failure to release them; or even democrats'
>>>> failure to seek their release at any other time except during Trump's
>>>> presidencies.
>>>
>>> Biden obeyed the laws which applied at that time.
>>
>> Non sequitur. There was no law requiring the release of the Epstein
>> files during his administration, so his DOJ released exactly zero pages
>> from the full investigative trove. Democrats in Congress didn't push for
>> any legislation to force it either, despite controlling the House for
>> part of his term. They had four years and did nothing.
>>
>>> Now explain why MAGAts are both claiming that the files are a hoax AND
>>> that they implicated Democrats...
>>
>> Beats me. If it's a hoax, why did Trump sign the law mandating their
>> release?
>>
>>> ...despite Democrats leading the charge to get the law passed that
>>> requires their release...
>>
>> Since when is Thomas Massie a democrat? Massie, not Democrats, filed the
>> discharge petition to force the vote when it stalled. It got bipartisan
>> support: 427-1 in the House, unanimous in the Senate, and Trump signed
>> it. If Democrats were hiding something, why push for a law forcing full
>> release? This was a rare win for transparency across parties—credit
>> where due, but it's not a one-sided story."
>>
>> By the way, why didn't democrats lead the charge when Biden was president?
>>
>>> ...while the DoJ is still trying to avoid fully complying with that law.
>>
>> The DOJ did miss the Dec. 19 deadline and got slammed for it—bipartisan
>> lawmakers like Massie (R) and Khanna (D) called it a 'massive failure'
>> and threatened contempt against AG Bondi. But they released over 3.5
>> million pages by Jan. 30, plus thousands of videos/images, and claim
>> it's full compliance with the law Trump signed. Critics say redactions
>> are too heavy and not everything's out (e.g., maybe up to 6 million
>> pages total), then turn around and whone that too much was released. If
>> they're 'avoiding' compliance, why release millions after the backlash?
>> This is more about bureaucratic delays and privacy fights than a
>> cover-up—bipartisan pressure fixed the initial fumble.
>
> Watching Alan and the other libtards attempting to defend Biden and the
> democrats on this one is hilarious.
> It just shows how TDS has infected their brains and rendered the thought
process
> essentially useless.
> This is very simple. The democrats tried every single avenue of trials,
raids,
> lies like Russia etc to stop Trump and these attempts took a lot of
organization
> and a lot of money and the outcomes, despite crooked partisan judges, was
still
> not guaranteed.
>
> Which brings us to the Epstein files which the Biden administration
controlled
> for 4 years.
> Yet not a peep out of them.
> they could have sunk Trump for good if they could produce evidence of him
playing
> with minors.
> But they didn't.
> Why?
> Answer is they examined the files and quickly discovered that democrats and
democrat supporters
> are mentioned all over the documentation.
>
> Ooopsie....
>
> It's that simple.
Exactly 100% correct.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
